Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

The land is in the countryside on a lane.
The area of land is a carbon copy of next door that has a bungalow on it already that was built perhaps 10 years or so ago where a bungalow already exsisted .
The land is within a line of houses so would squeeze between a house and a pub ( with plenty of room mind ) , its assumed its not greenfield as it has been stated its been used for gardens ... not gardens of the pub as they have a car park it butressess up against .
There is zero acess issues , opp is a field as is behind it .
There can not be a more obvious use of the land as it is prime for our intent

Locally theres a shed load of housing being built ( 1600+) as the area has been chosen as over spill housing under the governments directive and local council area of choise for housing .
The land has been used as gardens and is now overgrown mainly with trees , these trees are approx 25 foot and say 15-20 yrs old ? .

The local council have been approached to ask for provisional planning permission , this has been rejected . This was prior to the concept of the 1600 housing being built but still they have been approached and rejected the idea . I do not know why and cant think of a single reason for them not to grant this .

So the question to you wise people is 2 fold . What do you think would be the reason for not granting PP on what is clearly a piece of land screaming out to have a house built on it . Also if i were to buy it , bung a caravan on it , sit back and fight it what would i expect in the future and how likely are people whom are prepared to be extremely stubborn to get it finalised even if it takes a few years .

Oh and we are local to the area and have been for the last 14 years so if there were a ``local only `` covenant then that would explain it but the EA doesnt know cant help further .

The area of land is a carbon copy of next door that has a bungalow on it already that was built perhaps 10 years or so ago where a bungalow already exsisted .
The land is within a line of houses so would squeeze between a house and a pub ( with plenty of room mind ) , its assumed its not greenfield as it has been stated its been used for gardens ... not gardens of the pub as they have a car park it butressess up against.

Many councils used to encourage infill development, but this has become less popular since it led to people selling off their gardens for development. In some villages I know, it ended up with houses being built in the gardens of properties built in the gardens of other properties.

This kind of density of development changes the character of villages and is often unsustainable.

“

Locally theres a shed load of housing being built ( 1600+) as the area has been chosen as over spill housing under the governments directive and local council area of choise for housing .

...and this is the more up to date approach. The level of new homes required needs whole new towns and villages, so rather than destroying the character of existing settlements, councils are planning on a more strategic approach.

A development of 1600+ houses is likely to sustain other new facilities like shops, schools etc, which infill development never could.

“

The local council have been approached to ask for provisional planning permission , this has been rejected . This was prior to the concept of the 1600 housing being built but still they have been approached and rejected the idea . I do not know why and cant think of a single reason for them not to grant this.

Most likely because the proposal does not accord with the local plan... which at a guess says that development will be concentrated into the new 1600+ site and other locations will be looked at case by case with a presumption against building on gardens.

“

Also if i were to buy it , bung a caravan on it , sit back and fight it what would i expect in the future and how likely are people whom are prepared to be extremely stubborn to get it finalised even if it takes a few years .

You will probably need to get planning consent to site a caravan on the land if you intend to live in it. If you don't get consent, the council will take enforcement action against you (very expensive for you).

However stubborn you are, the Council can be more stubborn. They have the law and the courts to rely on if you attempt to buck the system.

The only thing that will make a difference is if you were able to win an appeal against the council's refusal (you will need professional advice how to do this) or if the council change their development plan and include new policies which favour development on this piece of land.

If you can name the council involved it might help to identify the policy they have which is causing the issue.

Additional info .
The areas a hamlet rather than a village . It is between 2 villages and the local housing is spread along the road frontage as is this piece of land . The village to the north ( 1/2 a mile ) is having as you say infill . A house is to be demolished to allow a road to the back garden and this land is being removed from being greenbelt . This is already happening locally however in our case this is simply a strip of land that matches the size and shape of the preceeding 8 houses . When i say its been garden it is identical to the land mass to the area next to it , the impression is given that the land was brought and a pacel was set asside exactly for future building .

Ive had a look as best as is possible . Theres simply a sureal amount if information to wade through so its not possible to easily point a finger and state what the council policy could be . The area locally has applications that will double a village 2 miles away in size and encompassses a massive amount of greenbelt . Every parcel of potential land is to be built on regardless of its status . Small developments are dotted throughout the local area , HS2 is also scuttling past within a mile . There is massive amounts of proposals for housing and industry locally . There simply isnt a clear concept of the future here and all this has kicked off after the planning was approached previously ( not by us ) . There are pressure groups trying to stem the tide of development here but this is going ignored by the council . I think its safe to assume that if a PP was applied for there should be little objection .

To enable us to be able to create our dream we would need to reduce our expenditure hence the caravan idea . I understand that we have the ability to stop 2 weeks in a year as a general rule , we would not indend to test the patience of the council by siting and moving in with planning be dammed . Im reluctant to state which council at the moment but can do in the very near future as we intend to put an offer in this weekend.

I own a bungalow in a hamlet between two villages. My garden land has good existing private access and would easily accommodate two more low-rise homes.

Nevertheless, I would not expect to obtain PP on my garden, because this would be regarded as unwelcome ribbon-type development in the countryside. The properties that make up the hamlet are mostly connected to outmoded farming practices, so there is no need for them in modern times.There's no justification for more development on the site, since both of the nearby settlements have land earmarked for building, supported by basic services. Indeed, 90 new houses are currently under construction in one of them.

In places where piecemeal self-build development has been allowed in the recent past, such as parts of Wales, the result has been long ribbons of property and settlements with no definite centre to them. This has allowed people their dream, but at a cost to the predominantly rural landscape.

As an aside, until a few years ago there were people living in caravans on a plot of land just outside the village boundary. Our council, being more tolerant than most, negotiated with the owners for roughly 10 years, but eventually took clearance action. The costs involved were substantial, so the land was seized to offset some of the public expenditure.

The council in your case must surely have a published development plan which you could consult.

Last edited by Davesnave; 05-01-2018 at 7:13 AM.
Reason: bad English

'A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they'll never sit in.'

Agreed that if pp was previously applied for you need to check the decision notice to see the original grounds for refusal. Note that may only give an indication as the local plan/ planning policies may have been reviewed and updated since the original application.

Also if the council has indicated PP would be refused have they not given you an indication of the reason they would be likely to refuse. I only ask as the planning dept I used to work in would certainly have said e.g. we'd be likely to refuse because the proposed application would breach policy X or y in the local plan, even on an initial pre-application discussion.

Everything as above, but one thing that hasn!!!8217;t been mentioned is that garden IS treated as greenfield now and has been for several years. It is not brownfield which is actually now called !!!8220;Previously Developed Land!!!8221; for what I assume is clarity. Your overgrown garden area will look more like one than the other - I can guess which!

I think you!!!8217;re crazy putting in an offer saying there's no real reason planning shouldn!!!8217;t be approved when
a) you haven!!!8217;t seen the Decision Notice for the rejection
b) you haven!!!8217;t read the Local Plan. Yes, it is a large document but they are sectioned and the vast majority can be eliminated by reading the headings and having a bit of a scan. The refusal wording on the Decision Notice will also help you find relevant part of the plan etc.

In my view, you should be employing a Planning Consultant to take a proper look at the chances of success. Why are people selling without PP when it makes the difference between land of very low value and land of great value? I!!!8217;d say it!!!8217;s because they are aware that they are going to fail continually.

It took us a long time to get planning permission for our house but the land cost us nothing and would have been worth 10% of what it is worth now with planning permission. I felt in my gut that developing the land was the right thing to do as ours was already previously developed. Our argument was about whether it was garden or previously developed. I did all the work for our successful application myself.

All the things that you think are relevant are actually irrelevant. You need to find reasons why the development is acceptable - that is within the Local Plan and NPPF. It all needs to relate directly to the plot and not to be full of !!!8220;but they!!!8217;re allowed to build!!!8221; unless there are some really relatable developments on the street. Unlikely, if we!!!8217;re talking about a hamlet.

Unless there has previously been a house or other suitable development on the land, you are probably buying a garden / corner of a field that is unlikely ever to achieve the planning permission that will allow it to be developed.
Even if the owner did sell it to you, if there is a whiff of a chance that you might get planning permission in future (which would of course greatly increase the value of the land), any sensible seller would slap on an "uplift" clause. ie if planning permission were ever to be granted, then a payment of X% of the increase in value would be due to be paid to the current seller. These uplift clauses can last for decades.
If you are dead set on buying it, then insert a clause in your offer that it is subject to you getting planning permission.
Otherwise, look forward to growing a few flowers and vegetables in your garden!

The areas a hamlet rather than a village . It is between 2 villages and the local housing is spread along the road frontage as is this piece of land . The village to the north ( 1/2 a mile ) is having as you say infill.

I would say this is the most likely reason why planning consent wouldn't be granted - Councils are far more concerned about sustainable development than they used to be, and concentrating development into hubs is considered more sustainable than ribbon development.

Even in rural areas consideration will be given to things like bus services and shops. Ribbon development usually means car dependency, and doesn't facilitate the strengthening of communities.

That is partly why previous restrictions on developing greenfield land have been lifted, and new restrictions are being applied to infill-type development. It makes more sense to build on greenfield adjacent to a village with a shop and a bus route than it does to build in the garden of a house in the middle of nowhere.

“

The area locally has applications that will double a village 2 miles away in size and encompassses a massive amount of greenbelt . Every parcel of potential land is to be built on regardless of its status . Small developments are dotted throughout the local area , HS2 is also scuttling past within a mile . There is massive amounts of proposals for housing and industry locally . There simply isnt a clear concept of the future here and all this has kicked off after the planning was approached previously ( not by us ).

As above, there is a concept, it is to concentrate development together, even if that means building on greenfield sites. It is just unfortunate for you that the site you are interested in isn't one that currently is seen as a priority to develop.

Everything as above, but one thing that hasn’t been mentioned is that garden IS treated as greenfield now and has been for several years. It is not brownfield which is actually now called “Previously Developed Land” for what I assume is clarity. Your overgrown garden area will look more like one than the other - I can guess which!

I think you’re crazy putting in an offer saying there's no real reason planning shouldn’t be approved when
a) you haven’t seen the Decision Notice for the rejection
b) you haven’t read the Local Plan. Yes, it is a large document but they are sectioned and the vast majority can be eliminated by reading the headings and having a bit of a scan. The refusal wording on the Decision Notice will also help you find relevant part of the plan etc.

In my view, you should be employing a Planning Consultant to take a proper look at the chances of success. Why are people selling without PP when it makes the difference between land of very low value and land of great value? I’d say it’s because they are aware that they are going to fail continually.

It took us a long time to get planning permission for our house but the land cost us nothing and would have been worth 10% of what it is worth now with planning permission. I felt in my gut that developing the land was the right thing to do as ours was already previously developed. Our argument was about whether it was garden or previously developed. I did all the work for our successful application myself.

All the things that you think are relevant are actually irrelevant. You need to find reasons why the development is acceptable - that is within the Local Plan and NPPF. It all needs to relate directly to the plot and not to be full of “but they’re allowed to build” unless there are some really relatable developments on the street. Unlikely, if we’re talking about a hamlet.

You assume all argument that it would be appropriate to grant future PP is irrelevent when of course it is not irrelivent whatsoever . The validity can be questioned but not the proposition . All rational would has to be considered as its fair to assume PP is granted based on being reasonable and fair and not on a whim or spurious reasons . What i state is very valid for reasons to consider PP to be approved although i would point out having a `gut` reason is also not valid so therefore based on the same argument it would never be approved in your case !...... The land was parcelled into building plots of stips of land sometimes after 1945 . Houses were then built on these except 1 was missed out for whatever reason and thats the strip of land thats in the here and now . It has been used as gardening in terminology only , it is not and has never been a garden to the propertys either side of the land . It is refered to as gardening given its not agriculture , its not brownfield , its just scrub land next to a pub .

As i pointed out theres has been nothing finalised . The council have been approched but nothing formal beyond a chat has taken place . Therefore there is no rejection in writing , it does not exist to be scanned over and other ideas considered .
I have also taken the time to try to get a grasp of a local plan but as i mentioned i have have yet to come across a clear consise worded document that details a generalisation of the area . If there is a single document i have yet to find it as have 2000 people who are protesting the building around here . I can only assume if it does exist it is not available to the public without a request .

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

Do note, while we always aim to give you accurate product info at the point of publication, unfortunately price and terms of products and deals can always be changed by the provider afterwards, so double check first.

We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the Section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.